Search for: "Cost v. Cost" Results 9841 - 9860 of 48,946
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Oct 2019, 6:00 am by Brian Gallini
In 1984, the Supreme Court created a now well-known “good faith” exception to the exclusionary rule in United States v. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 6:00 am
Not surprisingly, the CJEU’s ruling was followed in subsequent cases, including the ruling in L’Oréal v Ebay (...). [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 3:43 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
This appeal considers in what circumstances it is appropriate to make an order pursuant to section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, the effect of which is to impose on a liability insurer, where a liability insurer was contractually obliged to indemnify its insured against the costs of defending claims against it by third parties. [read post]
27 Oct 2019, 11:07 pm by Simon Gibbs
  The Court […] The post Proportionality revised by West v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust appeared first on The Defendant Legal Costs Specialists, UK | GWS Law. [read post]
27 Oct 2019, 7:08 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
Human Rights Tribunal recently released their decision in Yaniv v. [read post]
27 Oct 2019, 5:08 pm by INFORRM
IPSO has published a number of rulings and resolutions statements since our last Round Up: 07239-19 Heneghan v coventrytelegraph.net, 1 Accuracy (2019), Resolved- IPSO mediation 05741-19 Grant and Pitts v Mail Online, 1 Accuracy (2019), No breach- after investigation 01212-19 Ashley v The Sun, 1 Accuracy (2018), No breach- after investigation  Statements in Open Court and Apologies On 24 October 2019 there was a statement in open court [pdf] in the case of Morgan… [read post]
26 Oct 2019, 12:56 am
Just this week, the UK Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Unwired Planet v. [read post]
25 Oct 2019, 6:42 am
The Board found that these combined features are “essential to the use or purpose of the article or affect[] the cost or quality of the article," Inwood Labs., Inc. v. [read post]
25 Oct 2019, 4:41 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Somma v Dansker & Aspromonte Assoc., 44 AD3d 376, 377 [1st Dept 2007]; Alden v Brindisi, Murad, Brindisi, Pearlman, Julian & Pertz [“The People’s Lawyer”], 91 AD3d 1311, 1311 [4th Dept 2012]). [read post]